A cross-sectional survey GENERATE (GEospatial aNalysis of ExtRacorporeal membrane oxygenATion in Europe) initiated on behalf of the European chapter of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (EuroELSO), aims to provide a systematic, detailed description of contemporary Extracorporeal Life Support (ECLS) provision in Europe, map the spatial distribution of ECLS centers, and the accessibility of ECLS.
Methods
Structured data collection forms were used to create a narrative description of ECLS provision in EuroELSO affiliated countries. This consisted of both center-specific data and relevant national infrastructure. Data was provided by a network of local and national representatives. Spatial accessibility analysis was conducted where appropriate geographical data were available.
Results
281 centers from 37 countries affiliated to EuroELSO were included in the geospatial analysis and demonstrate heterogeneous patterns of ECLS provision. Accessibility of ECLS services within 1 hour of drive-time is available for 50% of the adult population in 8 of 37 countries (21.6%). This proportion is reached within 2 hours in 21 of 37 countries (56.8%) and within 3 hours in 24 of 37 countries (64.9%). For pediatric centers, accessibility is similar with 9 of 37 countries (24.3%) reached the covering of 50% of the population aged 0–14 within 1 hour and 23 of 37 countries (62.2%) within 2 hours and 3 hours.
Conclusions
ECLS services are accessible in most of the European countries, but their provision differs across the continent. There is still no solid evidence given regarding the optimal ECLS provision model. The spatial disparity in ECLS provision demonstrated in our analysis requires governments, healthcare professionals and policy makers to consider how to develop existing provision to accommodate the anticipated increase in need for time critical access to this advanced support modality.
RichardsonASCTonnaJENanjayyaV, et al.Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation in adults. Interim guideline consensus statement from the extracorporeal life support organization. ASAIO J2021; 67: 221–228.
2.
TonnaJEAbramsDBrodieD, et al.Management of adult patients supported with Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (VV ECMO) guideline from the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO). ASAIO J2021; 67: 601–610.
3.
BrownGMoynihanKMDeatrickKB, et al.Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO): Guidelines for pediatric cardiac failure. ASAIO J2021; 67: 463–475.
4.
WildKTRintoulNKattanJ, et al.Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO): guidelines for neonatal respiratory failure. ASAIO J2020; 66: 463–470.
5.
MarattaCPoteraRMVan LeeuwenG, et al.Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO): 2020 pediatric respiratory ELSO guideline. ASAIO J2020; 66: 975–979.
ConradSABromanLMTacconeFS, et al.The extracorporeal life support organization maastricht treaty for nomenclature in extracorporeal life support. A position paper of the extracorporeal life support organization. Am J Respir Crit Care Med2018; 198: 447–451.
8.
YannopoulosDBartosJRaveendranG, et al.Advanced reperfusion strategies for patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and refractory ventricular fibrillation (ARREST): a phase 2, single centre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet2020; 396: 1807–1816.
9.
PeekGJMugfordMTiruvoipatiR, et al.Efficacy and economic assessment of conventional ventilatory support versus extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for severe adult respiratory failure (CESAR): a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet2009; 374: 1351–1363.
10.
CombesAHajageDCapellierG, et al.Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med2018; 378: 1965–1975.
11.
NoahMAPeekGJFinneySJ, et al.Referral to an extracorporeal membrane oxygenation center and mortality among patients with severe 2009 influenza A (H1N1). JAMA2011; 306: 1659–1668.
12.
GoligherECTomlinsonGHajageD, et al.Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome and posterior probability of mortality benefit in a post hoc bayesian analysis of a randomized clinical trial. JAMA2018; 320: 2251–2259.
13.
MunshiLWalkeyAGoligherE, et al.Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Respir Med2019; 7: 163–172.
14.
BréchotNHajageDKimmounA, et al.Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation to rescue sepsis-induced cardiogenic shock: a retrospective, multicentre, international cohort study. Lancet2020; 396: 545–552.
15.
National Poisons Information Service. Toxbase toxbase.org (2019, accessed 27th January 2020).
16.
SoarJBöttigerBWCarliP, et al.European resuscitation council guidelines 2021: adult advanced life support. Resuscitation2021; 161: 115–151.
17.
LewisJZarateMTranS, et al.The recommendation and use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in cases reported to the california poison control system. J Med Toxicol2019; 15: 169–177.
18.
ChioncelOParissisJMebazaaA, et al.Epidemiology, pathophysiology and contemporary management of cardiogenic shock–a position statement from the heart failure association of the European society of cardiology. Eur J Heart Fail2020; 22: 1315–1341.
19.
KonstantinidesSVMeyerG. The 2019 ESC guidelines on the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism. Eur Heart J2019; 40: 3453–3455.
20.
ThieleHOhmanEMde Waha-ThieleS, et al.Management of cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction: an update 2019. Eur Heart J2019; 40: 2671–2683.
21.
DonninoMAndersenLDeakinC, et al.Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) for cardiac arrest–adults: consensus on science with treatment recommendations. International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) advanced life support task force. ASAIO J2019; 21: 2019.
22.
LottCTruhlářAAlfonzoA, et al.European resuscitation council guidelines 2021: cardiac arrest in special circumstances. Resuscitation2021; 161: 152–219.
23.
Van DiepenSKatzJNAlbertNM, et al.Contemporary management of cardiogenic shock: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation2017; 136: e232–e268.
24.
WeissSLPetersMJAlhazzaniW, et al.Surviving sepsis campaign international guidelines for the management of septic shock and sepsis-associated organ dysfunction in children. Intensive Care Med2020; 46: 10–67.
25.
MarascoSFLukasGMcDonaldM, et al.Review of ECMO (extra corporeal membrane oxygenation) support in critically ill adult patients. Heart Lung Circ2008; 17: S41–S47.
26.
Le ContePTerziNMortametG, et al.Management of severe asthma exacerbation: guidelines from the Société française de médecine d’urgence, the Société de réanimation de langue française and the French group for pediatric intensive care and emergencies. Ann Int Care2019; 9: 1–16.
27.
AlhazzaniWMøllerMHArabiYM, et al.Surviving sepsis campaign: guidelines on the management of critically ill adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Int Care Med2020; 46: 854–887.
28.
QuintelMGattinoniLWeber-CarstensS. The German ECMO inflation: when things other than health and care begin to rule medicine. Int Care Med2016; 42: 1264–1266.
29.
GillonSARowlandKShankar-HariM, et al.Acceptance and transfer to a regional severe respiratory failure and veno‐venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) service: predictors and outcomes. Anaesthesia2018; 73: 177–186.
30.
PatronitiNZangrilloAPappalardoF, et al.The Italian ECMO network experience during the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) pandemic: preparation for severe respiratory emergency outbreaks. Int Care Med2011; 37: 1447–1457.
31.
AubinHPetrovGDalyanogluH, et al.A Suprainstitutional network for remote extracorporeal life support: a retrospective cohort study. JACC Heart Fail2016; 4: 698–708.
32.
BeurtheretSMordantPPaolettiX, et al.Emergency circulatory support in refractory cardiogenic shock patients in remote institutions: a pilot study (the cardiac-RESCUE program). Eur Heart J2013; 34: 112–120.
33.
BarbaroRPMacLarenGBoonstraPS, et al.Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for COVID-19: evolving outcomes from the international extracorporeal life support organization registry. Lancet2021; 398: 1230–1238.
34.
LorussoRCombesALo CocoV, et al.ECMO for COVID-19 patients in Europe and Israel. Int Care Med2021; 47: 344–348.
35.
MangSKalenkaABromanLM, et al.Extracorporeal life support in COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome: a EuroELSO international survey. Artif Organs2021; 45: 495–505.
36.
EysenbachG. Improving the quality of web surveys: the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). J Med Internet Res2004; 6: e34.
School of Geography and Environmental Science UoSDoGaGUniversity of Louisville; Departement de GeographieUniversite de Namur. WorldPop: Open Spatial Demographic Data and Research. https://www.worldpop.org/geodata/summary?id=24798 (2022, accessed 11.08.2022).
NasrVGRamanLBarbaroRP, et al.Highlights from the extracorporeal life support organization registry: 2006-2017. ASAIO J2019; 65: 537–544.
41.
TonnaJEBarbaroRPRycusPT, et al.On the academic value of 30 years of the extracorporeal life support organization registry. ASAIO J2021; 67: 1–3.
42.
AbramsDGaranARAbdelbaryA, et al.Position paper for the organization of ECMO programs for cardiac failure in adults. Intensive Care Med2018; 44: 717–729.
43.
BaileyKLDowneyPSanaihaY, et al.National trends in volume-outcome relationships for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. J Surg Res2018; 231: 421–427.
44.
BarbaroRPOdetolaFOKidwellKM, et al.Association of hospital-level volume of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation cases and mortality. Analysis of the extracorporeal life support organization registry. Am J Respir Crit Care Med2015; 191: 894–901.
45.
FanEBrodieD. Higher volumes, better outcomes: the end or just the beginning of the story for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation?Am J Respir Crit Care Med2015; 191: 864–866.
46.
FreemanCLBennettTDCasperTC, et al.Pediatric and neonatal extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: does center volume impact mortality?Crit Care Med2014; 42: 512–519.
47.
IkeJDKempkerJAKramerMR, et al.The association between acute respiratory distress syndrome hospital case volume and mortality in a U.S. Cohort, 2002-2011. Crit Care Med2018; 46: 764–773.
48.
KaramlouTVafaeezadehMParrishAM, et al.Increased extracorporeal membrane oxygenation center case volume is associated with improved extracorporeal membrane oxygenation survival among pediatric patients. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg2013; 145: 470–475.
49.
KirklandBWWilkesJBaillyDK, et al.Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for pediatric respiratory failure: risk factors associated with center volume and mortality. Pediatr Crit Care Med2016; 17: 779–788.
50.
MaclarenGPasqualiSKDaltonHJ. Volume-outcome relationships in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: is bigger really better?Crit Care Med2014; 42: 726–727.
51.
McCarthyFHMcDermottKMSpraganD, et al.Unconventional volume-outcome associations in adult extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in the United States. Ann Thorac Surg2016; 102: 489–495.
IngvarsdottirILVidarsdottirHValssonF, et al.Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation treatment in a low-volume and geographically isolated cardiothoracic centre. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand2019; 63: 879–884.
54.
MarkovitzBPKukuyevaISoto-CamposG, et al.PICU volume and outcome: a severity-adjusted analysis. Pediatr Crit Care Med2016; 17: 483–489.
55.
RanneyDNBonadonnaDYerokunBA, et al.Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and interfacility transfer: a regional referral experience. Ann Thorac Surg2017; 104: 1471–1478.
KrzakAMFowlesJAVuylstekeA. Mobile extracorporeal membrane oxygenation service for severe acute respiratory failure - a review of five years of experience. J Intensive Care Soc2020; 21: 134–139.
58.
ForrestPRatchfordJBurnsB, et al.Retrieval of critically ill adults using extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: an Australian experience. Intensive Care Med2011; 37: 824–830.
59.
SherrenPBShepherdSJGloverGW, et al.Capabilities of a mobile extracorporeal membrane oxygenation service for severe respiratory failure delivered by intensive care specialists. Anaesthesia2015; 70: 707–714.
60.
FoleyDSPranikoffTYoungerJG, et al.A review of 100 patients transported on extracorporeal life support. ASAIO J2002; 48: 612–619.
61.
BromanLMHolzgraefeBPalmérK, et al.The Stockholm experience: interhospital transports on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Crit Care2015; 19: 278.
62.
EhrentrautSFSchrollBLenkeitS, et al.Interprofessional two-man team approach for interhospital transport of ARDS-patients under extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a 10 years retrospective observational cohort study. BMC Anesthesiol2019; 19: 19.
63.
EricssonAFrencknerBBromanLM. Adverse events during inter-hospital transports on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Prehosp Emerg Care2017; 21: 448–455.
64.
GannonWDStokesJWFrancoisSA, et al.Association between availability of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and mortality in patients with COVID-19 eligible for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a natural experiment. Am J Respir Crit Care Med2022; 205: 1354–1357.
65.
GerallCCheungEWKlein-CloudR, et al.Allocation of resources and development of guidelines for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO): Experience from a pediatric center in the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic. J Pediatr Surg2020; 55: 2548–2554.
66.
LebretonGSchmidtMPonnaiahM, et al.Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation network organisation and clinical outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic in greater Paris, France: a multicentre cohort study. Lancet Respir Med2021; 9: 851–862.
67.
OguraTOhshimoSLiuK, et al.Establishment of a disaster management-like system for COVID-19 patients requiring veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in Japan. Membranes (Basel)2021; 11: 625.
68.
SwolJBrodieDWillersA, et al.Human factors in ECLS - a keystone for safety and quality - a narrative review for ECLS providers. Artif Organs2022; 46: 40–49.
69.
BywoodPTErny-AlbrechtKM. Regionalisation of health services: benefits and impact. In: PHCRIS policy issue review. Adelaide: Primary Health Care Research & Information Service, 2016.
70.
CarrBGMatthew EdwardsJMartinezR. Regionalized care for time-critical conditions: lessons learned from existing networks. Acad Emerg Med2010; 17: 1354–1358.
71.
ChhabraKRDimickJB. Strategies for improving surgical care: when is regionalization the right choice?JAMA Surg2016; 151: 1001–1002.
72.
GhandourHZVervoortDWelkeKF, et al.Regionalization of congenital cardiac surgical care: what it will take. Curr Opin Cardiol2022; 37: 137–143.
73.
HoganANRosenbergerRFowlerRL. Emergency care regionalization. Emergency Medical Services, 2021, pp. 32–42.
74.
HuitemaAAHarknessKHeckmanGA, et al.The spoke-hub-and-node model of integrated heart failure care. Can J Cardiol2018; 34: 863–870.
75.
LeungSPastoresSMOropelloJM, et al.Regionalization of critical care in the United States: current state and proposed framework from the academic leaders in critical care medicine task force of the society of critical care medicine. Crit Care Med2022; 50: 37–49.
76.
JansenJOMorrisonJJWangH, et al.Access to specialist care: optimizing the geographic configuration of trauma systems. J Trauma Acute Care Surg2015; 79: 756–765.
77.
JansenJOMorrisonJJWangH, et al.Optimizing trauma system design: the GEOS (Geospatial Evaluation of Systems of Trauma Care) approach. J Trauma Acute Care Surg2014; 76: 1035–1040.
78.
HarveyMJGaiesMGProsserLA. U.S. and International in-hospital costs of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a systematic review. Appl Health Econ Health Policy2015; 13: 341–357.
79.
HayangaJWAAboagyeJBushE, et al.Contemporary analysis of charges and mortality in the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a cautionary tale. JTCVS Open2020; 1: 61–70.
80.
ShareDACampbellDABirkmeyerN, et al.How a regional collaborative of hospitals and physicians in Michigan cut costs and improved the quality of care. Health Aff (Millwood)2011; 30: 636–645.
81.
MaruniakSDruzhynaOLoskutovO, et al.Being perfusionist during the war - cardiac surgery under missile strikes. Perfusion2022; 11: 026765912211186. Epub ahead of print. DOI: 10.1177/02676591221118689
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
